University & High School Intervention to Prevent Problem Gambling

1. A University & High School Intervention to Prevent Problem Gambling Robert Williams & Dennis Connolly University of Lethbridge AGRI Annual Convention March 27 & 28, 2003

2. Current Educational Initiatives to Prevent Problem Gambling • largely been spear-headed by the provincial government agencies that provide treatment for substance abuse and problem gambling (e.g., AADAC, AFM). • Most of these agencies have developed ongoing ‘awareness campaigns’. • 1-800, 24 hour counselling/information ‘hotlines’ • Media promotion of responsible gaming • Posters/pamphlets in gaming establishments letting people know about the signs of problem gambling and where to go for help • Videos on problem gambling • 1-2 hour presentations to high school classes or other interested groups

3. Evaluation of the Educational Initiatives Good evidence that these initiatives increase individual awareness and knowledge (although this has been largely untested for gambling). Good evidence that over time they create community awareness, which provides support for individual change. On their own, awareness campaigns rarely have any impact on behaviour. While knowledge is a necessary antecedent to changing or preventing pathological behaviour, it is rarely sufficient on its own.

4. More substantive school-based educational efforts are required Prevention research suggests that these programs need to be: • Multi-session • Interactive and engaging • skill oriented

5. A few jurisdictions have recently introduced gambling prevention programs into the schools. • “Don’t Bet On It” in South Australia for ages 6 to 9. • “Gambling, Minimising Health Risks” in Queensland for levels 5 & 6. • “Facing the Odds” in Louisiana for grades 5 to 8. • “Wanna Bet” in Minnesota for grades 3 to 8. • “Count me Out” in Quebec for ages 8-17. • “Gambling: A Stacked Deck” in Alberta for ages 13-18. • However, these programs have different orientations, different lengths, and target different ages. It is somewhat unclear what the optimal program should look like. • Essential that these programs be evaluated to determine what works and what doesn’t. Important to avoid the mistakes of substance abuse, where the most commonly used (and entrenched) school-based programs tend to be the less effective ones.

6. Current university and high school projects in Alberta

7. University Project

8. Introduction • young adults have the highest rates of involvement in most risky behaviours • gambling is no different • 18-24 has the highest rate of gambling participation and problem gambling • surprisingly high rates in college and university students

9. Few initiatives targeting young adults • the few existing prevention efforts have targeted adolescents rather than young adults • this is because gambling begins at a very young age and adolescents can be accessed through their schools

10. Introductory Statistics is a natural fit for teaching critical thinking about gambling • no research on whether superior knowledge of gambling probabilities impacts gambling attitudes or behaviour of college and university students

11. two literatures that would support this: • positive impact of educating problem gamblers on the nature of randomness, gambling probabilities, and errors of thinking (e.g., Ladouceur et al., 2000) • statistically trained college students have improved risk assessment and better general reasoning skills for everyday problems (e.g., Nisbett et al., 1993)

12. Method • Intervention given in “Introduction to Probability & Statistics” in Fall/01 & Winter/02 semesters at University of Lethbridge. • 5 lectures devoted exclusively to probabilities associated with gambling. • 4 labs provided hands-on demonstrations of roulette, craps, etc. • 1 lecture on cognitive errors/gambling fallacies. • assigned supplemental text that deals exclusively with gambling probabilities.

14. Method • 2 Intro Stats sections taught by Dennis Connolly served as Intervention Group (n=109) • 2 Intro Stats sections taught by 2 other math instructors served as Math Control Group (n=135) • a History class and Sociology class served as the Non-Math Control Group (n=85)

15. Method • Baseline questionnaire collected & assessed: • demographic information • knowledge and ability to calculate gambling odds • cognitive errors common in gambling • attitude toward gambling • gambling behaviour (time, frequency, $, CPGI) • Questionnaire re-administered 6 months after the intervention

16. Results - Gambling Math Skill(score range: 0 to 9) *

17. Results - Cognitive Errors(score range: 0 to 9) *

18. Results - Attitudes(score range: -6 to +6)

19. Results - Gambling Frequency(3=2-3/month; 4=1/week)

20. Results - Gambling Time(4=2-4 hr/occasion; 5=4-8 hr/occasion)

21. Results - $ lost/won(-1=lost $1-$20 in past month)

22. Results - Average CPGI(score range 0-27)

23. Discussion

24. Variables most strongly associated with baseline gambling behaviour • Positive attitude toward gambling • Asian • Male • Management major • Variables most strongly associated with decreases in gambling behaviour at 6-month follow-up • Changes in attitude (more negative)

25. High School Project

26. Method • Implementation occurred at 2 sites in the Sep 2001 – Jun 2002 school year: Calgary & rural Aboriginal schools • Each site had a school that received the intervention and a school that served as the control school • Calgary involved grade 10 & 11 students • Comparisons between intervention and control conditions at pre-intervention; post-intervention; and 3-month follow-up

27. Program Content & Format • 5 sessions long, each session 100 minutes • Interactive program with strong emphasis on skill learning and application of knowledge • Program also targeted the social environment of students receiving the program • Lesson 1: Gambling: Types & Odds • Lesson 2: Problem Gambling • Lesson 3: Gambling Fallacies • Lesson 4: Decision Making & Problem Solving • Lesson 5: Barriers to Good Decision Making & Problem Solving

28. Gambling is part of an inter-related set of high risk/problem behaviours Psychological Problems Problem Gambling Antisocial Behaviour Substance Abuse School/Work Problems Poor Health Practises Interpersonal Problems

29. Caused by a common set of factors Biological Environmental Self-Controlled  Impulsive Risk aversive  Risk seeking Stress resilient  Stress vulnerable Strong intellect/skills  Weak intellect/skills Abusive/neglectful  Nurturing/disciplinedupbringing upbringingAntisocial parental  Prosocial parentalModelling modellingDeviant peer group  Prosocial peer groupPoor schools/  Good schools/teachers teachers

30. Results (Calgary) • 597 students administered the baseline questionnaire at both schools • 469/597 (79%) provided parental consent allowing questionnaire to be used • 469/469 (100%) response rate at post-intervention • 347/469 (74%) response rate at 3 month follow-up

31. Results - Knowledge * *

32. Results – Cognitive Errors(lower scores = fewer errors) * *

33. Results – Odds Calculation * *

34. Results – Attitudes(higher scores = more negative attitudes) * *

35. Results – Money Lost *

36. Results – Gambling Time

37. Results – Gambling Frequency

38. Discussion

39. Variables most strongly associated with baseline gambling behaviour • Positive attitude toward gambling • More gambling fallacies • Lack of gambling knowledge • Risk taking • Impulsivity • Having won a significant sum gambling • Variables most strongly associated with decreases in gambling behaviour at 3-month follow-up • Changes in attitude (more negative) • Changes in knowledge (more knowledge) • Changes in cognitive errors (fewer)

40. Lessons learned from these projects relevant to prevention initiatives • Teaching people about gambling odds may be analogous to telling smokers about the harmful effects of smoking or drinkers about the harmful effects of drinking  perhaps not that important in prevention initiatives. • Developing a more negative attitude toward gambling most strongly predicts decreased gambling behaviour. • Improving people’s knowledge about problem gambling appears to be important (and perhaps a mechanism by which attitudes change). • Teaching people about the cognitive errors underlying gambling fallacies is important. • Trying to improve generic decision making, problem solving, and coping skills is probably important.

41. The End!